New Scottish poll shows why it’s time to ditch Holyrood’s voting system

The latest poll from Ipsos shows why it’s time to ditch the Additional Member System used to elect MSPs.

The company’s latest survey grabbed the headlines for placing Reform second, behind the SNP, on the constituency vote. Neither Nigel Farage’s rising party, nor UKIP before it, have even won seats at Holyrood so this result would be a seismic shift in political behaviour.

However, beneath the headlines of Reform’s surge, the polling numbers alongside seat projections tell a different story. One of a creaking electoral system past its best.

The poll puts the SNP on 35% and 28% for constituency and list vote shares respectively. According to projections by Ballot Box Scotland, that is estimated to give the party 60 seats. That’s almost 47% of seats available.

The difference is staggering. Under AMS where seats are meant to match list vote share, BBS projects that the party would likely win around 40 seats. That’s still above the 28% of seats they would be entitled to under a fully proportional system (usual caveats about different voting systems impacting voting intention).

The biggest difference here is with the SNP. The party has lost significant support since 2021 but benefits from a fragmented unionist vote, with four parties competing for anti-independence voters – namely the Lib Dems, Labour, Conservatives and Reform.

BBS projects Scottish Labour would win 19 seats if Scotland voted like this. That’s 4 fewer than if a more proportional AMS was used (23).

Reform lose out the most, projected to win 6 short of the 23 they would win in a “better AMS”.

The Greens are projected to win 17 seats (AMS ideal: 21), the Conservatives 11 (AMS ideal: 14) and the Lib Dems 5 (compared to 8 under AMS ideal).

This result would mark a major shift in Scottish party politics, and a major decline in support for the Westminster duopoly. But that change risks not being fully shown in terms of seats.

Next year marks 27 years of devolution and the sixth Scottish election. Wales has reviewed and changed its fairly disproportional voting system for something somewhat better. Scotland’s sixth parliament should legislate to do the same.

The risk of 2021 was Alex Salmond’s Alba gaming the system to win a disproportionate independence supermajority. As we know, that outcome never emerged. This time, the threat of a seriously disproportionate election result comes from something much more likely. If the results in May look something like this, let’s hope they’re a wake-up call to our new legislators.

Kate Forbes is stepping down in 2026. A record number of MSPs aren’t standing again

By Richard Wood

Deputy First Minister Kate Forbes is stepping down as an MSP at the next Scottish Parliamentary election.

Her upcoming departure marks a record number of MSPs standing down at any Holyrood election.

The announcement came as a shock to much of the Scottish political scene after she contested the 2023 SNP leadership election and secured Scotland’s second top job under First Minister John Swinney last year.

In a letter to the FM on 4 August 2025, the DFM said she does not wish to “miss any more of the precious early years of family life.

After careful thought over recess, I’ve decided not to seek re-election to @scotparl next year.

I’ve written to the First Minister this morning 👇🏽

I will continue to serve the First Minister, the Government and my constituents to the best of my ability until May 2026. pic.twitter.com/oNV4DGoelF
— Kate Forbes MSP (@_KateForbes) August 4, 2025

How many MSPs have stood down at each election?

So far, the total for 2026 is 35 MSPs (as of 8 July 2025). This beats the previous high of 34 in 2021, which included former Scottish Conservative leader Ruth Davidson.

And back in 2016, there were 25 MSPs who stood down (23 who retired and 2 who were deselected by their parties). Among the retirees at this election were former First Minister Alex Salmond, former Scottish Conservative leader Annabelle Goldie and the Presiding Officer Tricia Marwick.

A similar number stepped down at the election before. Among the 20 who retired in 2011 were former Deputy First Minister Nichol Stephen and former Scottish Green co-convenor.

Just 13 MSPs retired in 2007 including independent MSP Dennis Canavan and former Deputy First Minister Jim Wallace.

And in 2003, there were 10 MSPs who stepped down including our shortest-serving First Minister Henry McLeish and Westminster’s 1967 Hamilton by-election winner, the SNP’s Winnie Ewing.

Each year the number has gone up:

2026 – 35

2021 – 34

2016 – 25

2011 – 20

2007 – 13

2003 – 10

IMAGE: Via Scottish Government (lisence)

How many MSPs are retiring in 2026? Is it a record number?

By Richard Wood

UPDATE: There are now 35 MSPs stepping down in 2026 following the announcement by Deputy First Minister Kate Forbes.

The late June announcement of Presiding Officer Alison Johnstone’s retirement from Holyrood means that 34 MSPs are stepping down from the Scottish Parliament in 2026.

This figure matches the number of retiring MSPs in 2021. That was the record-high number, meaning that any further announcements will ensure that 2026 has the highest number of retiring MSPs in Holyrood history. Considering the last retirement announcements for 2021 were in March that year, it’s almost certain that 2026 will mark a new record.

That’s perhaps not surprising, with the number of long-standing MSPs from the so-called 1999 club calling it a day, including Nicola Sturgeon, Richard Lochead, Rhoda Grant, Fiona Hyslop and Christine Graeme all stepping down. But it also includes newer MSPs including Humza Yousaf, Mairi Gougeon and Beatrice Wishart.

Age plays a role for some of these MSPs in both categories. As does arguably scandal, with Michael Matheson set to retire as well. Then there’s the wholly valid reason of some MSPs saying they want to spend time raising their young families, away from the demanding nature of a parliamentary role.

How many MSPs have stood down at each election?

So far, the total for 2026 is 34 MSPs (as of 3 July 2025). This matches the previous high of 34 in 2021, which included former Scottish Conservative leader Ruth Davidson.

A similar number stepped down at the election before. Among the 20 who retired in 2011 were former Deputy First Minister Nichol Stephen and former Scottish Green co-convenor.

Just 13 MSPs retired in 2007 including independent MSP Dennis Canavan and former Deputy First Minister Jim Wallace.

And in 2003, there were 10 MSPs who stepped down including our shortest-serving First Minister Henry McLeish and Westminster’s 1967 Hamilton by-election winner, the SNP’s Winnie Ewing.

Each year the number has gone up.

2026 – 34*
2021 – 34
2016 – 25
2011 – 20
2007 – 13
2003 – 10
1999 – N/A

*As of July 2025.

Which MSPs are stepping down in 2026?

As of late June 2026, the following 32 MSPs are stepping down:

SNP

Annabelle Ewing, Audrey Nicoll, Bill Kidd, Christine Grahame, Elena Witham, Evelyn Tweed, Fergus Ewing, Fiona Hyslop, Gordon MacDonald, Graeme Dey, Humza Yousaf, James Dornan, Joe FitzPatrick, Mairi Gougeon, Michael Matheson, Michelle Thomson, Natalie Don-Innes, Nicola Sturgeon, Richard Lochead, Rona Mackay, Ruth Maguire, Shona Robinson, Willie Coffey.

Conservatives

Douglas Ross, Edward Mountain, Liz Smith, Maurice Golden, Oliver Mundell.

Labour

Alex Rowley, Richard Leonard.

Liberal Democrats

Beatrice Wishart.

Greens

Alison Johnstone.

Independents

John Mason.

What about 2031?

We’re still along way from the election after 2026. Much will depend on the make-up of the new parliament – with big questions still to be answered like how well will Reform do next year? Will there be a coalition or a confidence and supply arrangement? And if John Swinney emerges as First Minister will he step down before 2031 (when he’ll be 67)?

But with so many of the 1999 club now having left Holyrood’s benches, there’s a decent chance that 2031 will be the first election where the number of retiring MSPs is lower than the previous one.

Minority mayors and unrepresentative local government: England can learn from Scottish councils

By Richard Wood

This year’s local elections showed the unfairness of First Past the Post in action. A third of England went to the ballot box this May, but seats ultimately failed to reflect votes thanks to the unrepresentative voting system.

Unrepresentative local government

As with the House of Commons elections, English councils are elected via First Past the Post. And of course, the same problems persist at the local level: citizens aren’t fairly represented. Take, Kent County Council where Reform won a majority of seats on 37% of the vote. Our Shropshire where the Lib Dems took a majority of seats on a minority of votes.

England’s local electoral system is not first for purpose. Especially in the age of multi-party politics.

There’s a lesson here to be learnt from Scotland. Local authorities from Dumfries & Galloway to Shetland have successfully used STV to elect councillors since 2017. STV ensures that how Scots vote is reflected in local councils, so why not England? The upcoming elections Bill strikes as a clear opportunity to push this issue.

Minority mayors

Unlike Scotland, England also has a number of directly elected executive mayors. This year six mayoralities were up for grabs, now all elected using First Past the Post having either previously been voted via the Supplementary Vote or brand new mayors. All mayors were elected with less than half the vote. The worst culprit here was the West of England where Labour’s candidate won on 25% of the vote.

Greater Lincolnshire: Andrea Jenkyns (Reform): 42.0%

Hull and East Yorkshire: Luke Campbell (Reform ) 35.8%

Doncaster: Ros Jones (Labour): 32.6%

North Tynside: Karen Clark (Labour): 30.2%

Cambridgeshire and Peterborough: Paul Bristow (Conservative): 28.4%

West of England: Helen Godwin (Labour): 25.0%

With such weak mandates, while there are flaws with single-member executive positions, if we are to have them in England they should be elected via preferential voting (the Alternative Vote also known as ranked choice voting).

The current system of low votes is unsustainable.

Similarly, while Scotland doesn’t have mayors currently, if they are introduced after the Holyrood elections they should be elected via such a preferential method.

English local government needs reform. Scotland had the answers.

IMAGE VIA PIXABAY

Carney’s Liberals win in Canada a decade on from Trudeau’s promise to abolish FPTP

By Richard Wood

Before the return of Donald Trump, Canada’s Conservative looked set to sail to power in 2025, ending a decade of Liberal rule. But a maverick president and his trade war have shifted the dial dramatically, resulting in Liberal Mark Carney returning as Prime Minister, having called an early election just weeks into the job. The Conservative leader even lost his seat.

There are of course significant geopolitical implications flowing from this development as the world grapple with an emboldened President Trump, but it’s important to examine Canada’s election through the lens of electoral reform.

The flaws of First Past the Post exposed once again

Like the UK, Canada uses the unrepresentative First Past the Post system to elect MPs. As in 2024’s UK General Election, Canada has been given a parliament that doesn’t fairly reflect how people vote.

The Liberals have likely won just shy of a majority of seats on around 43% of the vote (although with some places still counting a majority government is still technically possible). Their vote share is the party’s largest in decades but that doesn’t legitimise the country’s unfair voting system and shouldn’t lead them to winning almost half the seats available.

The Conservatives have in fact won a vote share roughly proportional to the number of seats they won, but that is a rarity in FPTP politics and doesn’t mitigate the fact that millions of Canadians voted Conservative but are without direct Conservative representation.

Then there’s the NDP. The party have suffered at the hands of their former voters turning on them and backing Carney to oppose Poilievre and Trump. The party has been reduced to just 2% of seats on 6% of the vote, significantly fewer than if seats matched votes.

Of course, while the NDP stand across Canada and Bloc Québécois in only one province, the parties won similar vote shares but notably different numbers of seats (the Bloc doing better by winning over 20 seats).

Two wrong-winner elections

Carney’s win follows two elections (2019 and 2021) where the Liberals under Justin Trudeau won the most seats, forming minority governments, but on fewer votes than the Conservatives.

While Canadians have avoided a third wrong-winner election in a row, seats overall still don’t match votes and voters are stuck with single-member ridings where MPs can’t fairly represent all their constituents.

Canada’s missed opportunity for Proportional Representation

Most campaigners for electoral reform across the English speaking world will know that Trudeau famously promised to abolish First Past the Post ahead of the 2015.

His party leapfrogged from third to first-place, forming a government with a majority of seats, then U-turned, making no effort to reform the voting system despite a decade in power.

Frustratingly, as in the UK, First Past the Post remains in place to this day. Voting reform didn’t even get a mention in Carney’s 2025 manifesto.

Canada, like the UK has a strong case to give FPTP the boot and embrace Proportional Representation.

(IMAGE: licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license)

Unlock Democracy backs campaign to engage with Modernisation Committee to clean up politics

By Richard Wood

Unlock Democracy has backed my motion to engage with the Modernisation Committee on issues including second job restrictions for MPs and creating job descriptions for parliamentarians.

The Modernisation wants to hear from people about what additional ideas they have for work it could take forward, covering the strategic aims of: driving up standards; improving culture and working practices; and reforming Parliamentary procedures to make the House of Commons more effective.

Policy Motion 1: Working with the Modernisation Committee

Proposer: Richard Wood

Seconder: Rebecca Warren

The AGM notes:

The Government has revived the House of Commons Modernisation Committee. This is a cross-party committee of MPs that will consider ‘reforms to House of Commons procedures, standards, and working practices’.

The Committee’s remit overlaps with aspects of Unlock Democracy’s ‘Cleaning Up Politics’ campaign, such as setting limits on MPs’ second jobs and establishing a job description for MPs. Cleaning up politics was ranked as Unlock Democracy’s second most important campaign by supporters in the 2023 Annual Survey.

Unlock Democracy has started establishing a relationship with the Committee. Director Tom Brake questioned the Committee’s chair, Lucy Powell MP, at the Labour Party Conference about the Committee’s work on MPs’ second jobs.

The Committee has agreed to circulate our paper on MPs second jobs, and has invited us to respond to their call for views from stakeholders later in the year.

The AGM welcomes that:

Unlock Democracy has identified this Committee as important for achieving many of our campaign goals

Unlock Democracy has begun building a relationship with the Committee

Unlock Democracy has compiled a list of campaign asks for the Modernisation Committee to consider

The AGM calls on Unlock Democracy:

To respond to the Committee’s consultation with stakeholders

To get in touch with MPs on the Committee with suggestions for improving the House of Commons’ procedures and standards

To involve Unlock Democracy’s members and supporters in efforts to influence the Committee

To work with other organisations in the democracy sector, where beneficial, to influence the Committee.

What does the Electoral Reform Society say about dual mandates in Scotland?

By Richard Wood

Dual mandates are back in the spotlight again with two sitting SNP MPs, Stephen Flynn and Stephen Gethins, preparing possible bids for joining the Scottish Parliament as MSPs.

Both Douglas Ross (Conservative) and Katy Clark (Labour) have held dual mandates in this parliamentary session at Holyrood.

Double jobbing is bad for representative democracy as the roles of MSP and MP are full-time jobs in and of themselves. Constituents ultimately deserve full-time representatives not part-timers.

Momentum is shifting on the issue with the Scottish Parliament’s Standards, Procedures and Appointments Committee discussing the matter only last week in relation to the Scottish Elections (Representation and Reform) Bill: Stage 2. The Modernisation Committee in Westminster also has scope for discussing the issue in its remit on outside employment.

What do the Electoral Reform Society say on the issue?

The Electoral Reform Society, formed in 1884, campaigns for democratic rights and a democracy fit for the 21st century.

The organisation submitted the below response to a request from the Scottish Parliament’s petitions committee in 2023.

Being a councillor and an MP or MSP seems reasonable over a
temporary transition period. However, we are concerned that given the limitations in the capacity of MSPs, ‘double jobbing’ adds an extra strain. Therefore we would like to see the legislation here brought into line with The Senedd where the rules are that when a member is elected and holds a dual mandate they either have eight days to resign as a sitting MP, or they have to take a leave of absence from a seat they hold in the Lords, or if a Regional Councillor they can remain in post provided the expected day of the next Regional Election is within 372 days.

Having a full-time paid job in the Lords, Commons or Holyrood should be mutually exclusive, and we would advise against MSPs being allowed to hold a dual mandate. There are no clear advantages to voters or to the
operation of democratic institutions and one big disadvantage – the
capacity of an individual to fulfil the responsibilities of both roles. Such
an allowance seems to be in the interests of politicians rather than those they represent.

The Electoral Reform Society is right to support abolishing dual mandates. It also recognises the need for a short grace period for MPs or MSPs to pick where they wish to represent their constituents before being removed from the parliament they reject.

Image free via Pixabay

Stephen Flynn MSP-MP in 2026? A dual mandates ban is overdue

By Richard Wood

Westminster leader Stephen Flynn plans to stand to become an MSP at the 2026 Holyrood elections. Flynn intends to remain an MP, if he wins the Scottish Parliament seat of Aberdeenshire South and North Kincardine, implying he would hold a dual mandate by representing seats in both Holyrood and Westminster until 2029.

Dual mandates – no matter which party holds them, and Scotland’s four main party’s have held them at one time or another – are bad for representative democracy.

Being an MSP or and MP is a full-time job. Constituents deserve representatives working full-time for them, not juggling multiple mandates and travelling across the country all the time. No matter which party they come from, whether it is the Conservatives’ Douglas Ross, the SNP’s Stephen Flynn or any of the former Labour and Lib Dem dual mandates holders at Holyrood.

https://twitter.com/StephenFlynnSNP/status/1856235419936931843?t=NDBCzeng2IdW042lMN0olg&s=19

Westminster has rightly banned MPs from holding elected office in the Northern Irish Assembly. And there is an effective ban of MP-MSs for Wales with exceptions in the case of an impending Senedd election.

More widely, dual mandates are banned in many democracies across the world. Even France, long known for its representatives holding dual mandates – and even triple mandates – has clamped down on the practice in recent years.

Members of the European Parliament are also forbidden from holding roles in their national parliament alongside their MEP roles.

Stephen Flynn MP has every right to stand for the Scottish Parliament. But it’s surprising he’s made the decision to do so while explicitly saying he’s remain an MP if he were to be elected.

Westminster’s Modernisation Committee has an opportunity here to recommend preventing MPs from holding seats in the Scottish Parliament concurrently.

In the meantime, Stephen Flynn MP should reconsider his intentions to hold his Westminster seat if elected to Holyrood.

Image by Roger Harris (This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported license)

Labour’s false “supermajority” and widespread tactical voting expose the flaws of FPTP

The UK’s new Prime Minister Keir Starmer

By Richard Wood

The 2024 UK General Election has exposed the flaws of Westminster’s First Past the Post once again.

The 4 July vote shows just how much the voting system used to elect MPs distorts how people vote at the ballot box. While Labour did well, Keir Starmer’s party won 63% of seats on just 34% of the vote.

This is a staggering mismatch between seats and votes, exposing the absurd unfairness of our electoral system once again.

Meanwhile, Reform secured 14% of the vote. Under a proportional voting system they would have roughly 14% seats but in the end they only scraped five seats. Similarly, the Greens only managed four seats on 7% of the vote.

The Lib Dems won 72 seats (11% of those available) on 12% vote, by coincidence broadly in line with their share of the vote. While the Conservatives – champions of our regressive system – suffered at its hands by winning 19% of seats on 24% of the vote.

The election has been called the most unrepresentative in British political history. In fact, the Gallagher index (a measure of electoral proportionality) was 24 (the highest ever in a UK election), backing these claims.

Some discussion of the Gallagher Index in the last few days, but the alternative Sainte-Laguë index paints an even worse picture – giving a disproportionality score of 48.8, a solid 49% more skewed than the second least proportional election (2015). pic.twitter.com/yoUHGrIEls
— Dylan Difford (@Dylan_Difford) July 6, 2024

Of course, anti-Consevative tactical voting likely widened the disparity between seats and votes – with Lib Dem votes piling up in areas they could win and Labour in areas they could take. But that’s no excuse for the reality where we have a system in which, forgetting all motivations for why people vote a particular way, the total number of votes per party doesn’t result in result in matching seat shares. Tactical voting is a symptom of First Past the Post, showing the need for electoral reform. And at the end of the day, people deserve to vote for their favoured candidates without the fear that their vote won’t count. You should be able to vote for something, rather than forced into voting against something else.

What next for the electoral reform movement?

First Past the Post has once again been exposed as a failed system. But with this comes opportunity for change.

While Labour’s leadership oppose a change in voting system, the massive mismatch is cutting through to citizens. There’s an opportunity here to stress this mismatch and make the case for Proportional Representation and continue the fight for reform.

It’s time to redouble our efforts to secure electoral reform. It’s time for Proportional Representation.

How you can help

The below organisations are fighting for fair votes. Learn more and join them below:

Image source: House of Commons (CC 3.0 License)

3 tests Anas Sarwar’s Scottish metro mayor plans must meet

By Richard Wood

Leader of the Scottish Labour Party Anas Sarwar has called for Scottish metro mayors in a speech marking 25 years of devolution.

The remarks follow his party winning all but one metro mayoral seats up for election south of the border this May, the most notable of which was Richard Parker’s win against incumbent Conservative Mayor Andy Street.

The main appeal of metro mayors is their ability to champion the areas they represent on scale not quite seen by constituency MPs. There’s little denying that Andy Burnham is able to grab media and government attention in a unique way suited to our current news and political landscape. Not to mention that to many voters elected mayors are seen as more accountable than a largely unnoticed council cabinet committee.

Furthermore, a metro mayor equivalent for Dundee for example could give different parts of Scotland the political attention they deserve, shifting focus away from the central belt.

However, metro mayors are far from a panacea. Despite the profile brought by the likes of Andy Burnham and Sadiq Khan, the elections that put them in power are characterised by low turnout.

On top of that, elected mayors mark a shift away from deriving local government executives from elected councils. Concentrating such powers in one individuals would be a major jump from the culture of consensus set out with the set-up of the Scottish Parliament and shift to STV for local authorities, pushing Scotland in a more majoritarian direction.

Additionally, Scottish local government has far bigger problems such as funding and structural issues that imposing elected mayors or provosts won’t fix.

Any discussion about moving to a metro mayor system must be open, honest and frank. Crucially, three tests must be met if Scotland were to go down the path of introducing metro mayors.

1. Checks and balances

Elected mayors put a significant amount of power in the hands of one individual. Yes, they have a team that do much of the day to day work but ultimately directly elected executive mayors arguably give mayors too much power. A simple truth about democracy is that despite best intentions, one individual cannot fairly represent the views of all their constituents. Any elected mayors would need to be accountable to voters at elections and to elected councils – proportionately elected and with real powers of scrutiny – throughout their term.

2. Preferential voting

The UK government’s Election Act changed the voting system for directly elected executive mayors from the Supplementary Vote to First Past the Post. The Supplementary Vote was far from perfect but it at least gave a broader mandate to elected mayors as opposed to FPTP. If Scotland follows England, we should learn from the mistakes of the Elections Act and use the Alternative Vote to elect mayors. A preferential voting system would empower voters and give mayors the broad mandates they need to lead.

3. Referendum

Lastly, directly elected executive mayors should not be imposed on a populace without consent, whether that be by any new Scottish Government or local authorities themselves. Any proposals should be subject to a significant consultation process and conclude with a referendum to determine whether they are the right decision for each community. Likewise, communities should be able to vote to revert to a cabinet system for local government if they choose.

The adoption of directly elected executive Scottish mayors is an intriguing prospect but it would have significant downsides, notably the concentration of executive power in one pair of hands and a major shift away from the consensus-building democracy that has characterised Scotland in the age of devolution.

There are of course potential benefits as seen in England but any concrete proposals for reform should be carefully examined and criticised where appropriate.

If Scottish Labour, or any other party, do ever introduce elected mayors then their implementation must pass the three tests outlined above. However, lawmakers should in the first instance focus on more pressing issues facing local authorities as opposed to looking south for flashy reforms that aren’t necessarily what they seem. Anas Sarwar should consider all this if introducing metro mayors is ever something he gets the powers to do.

IMAGE SOURCE: This work contains Scottish Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Scottish Parliament Licence.